Post B0bAEZDEGIvL8yNPSC by smlx4@mastodon.nu
(DIR) More posts by smlx4@mastodon.nu
(DIR) Post #B0aiiNz9lqGAILDzeq by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-25T03:08:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
The senate has been suspended after P Hanson wore a burga in the chamber, repeating a stunt she pulled back in 2017. The One Nation leader walked into the chamber during a division wearing the head covering. Hanson has been trying to introduce a bill to have burgas & face coverings banned in AU.”Whatever our own beliefs may be, the sort of disrespect you are engaging in now, is not worthy of a member of the Australian senate & it should not be allowed to stand.- Penny Wong, Foreign Minister.
(DIR) Post #B0aiiPDjB9Ve7p390a by djsumdog@djsumdog.com
2025-11-25T03:23:36.172878Z
2 likes, 0 repeats
I don't understand your reasoning. Isn't the burka a symbol of oppression in an of itself showing women are the property of their families with no right to even show themselves to anyone else?I don't understand what's disrespectful about the point she's trying to make. Now I'm not for the state coming in and banning things, but Australia is a rampant authoritarian state, so it shouldn't be out of their wheelhouse to ban clothing as they have mandated clothing in the past.
(DIR) Post #B0am8UjxZvCKdWG3Hs by sun@shitposter.world
2025-11-25T04:02:00.664824Z
4 likes, 2 repeats
@djsumdog @smlx4 65 years ago in the USA women willingly doing this shit was correctly recognized this “choice” as internalized oppression and now idiots parade it
(DIR) Post #B0aqIBO4mpwlKJtfqC by sim@shitposter.world
2025-11-25T04:48:35.909205Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@sun @djsumdog @smlx4 I don't know why you would want anyone walking about in public completely covered up. It's a huge safety problem since they are unidentifiable. You don't know if they are a woman or not. You can't read their body language as well, especially the face. But it is a huge shame problem. I remember a case where I think it was the uncle that got beaten up for his niece accidentally showing skin in public. If you want to avoid being beaten up then it is easier to keep women inside when you think about it based on that alone. Entire families literally keep women inside through shame. Even the women themselves.
(DIR) Post #B0bAEZDEGIvL8yNPSC by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-25T08:12:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sun @djsumdog your argument assumes that all Muslim women lack agency. It’s simply not true. Calling their choices “internalized oppression” erases the voices of women who say they choose their clothes for faith, identity, or personal comfort. Criticizing patriarchy is very valid, but definitely not to use it to righteously target or humiliate a minority group in parliament. It’s possible to oppose oppression without supporting tricks that stigmatize real people.
(DIR) Post #B0bAEa8eomrS15FGy0 by djsumdog@djsumdog.com
2025-11-25T08:31:57.769501Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
define agency
(DIR) Post #B0bkD5FzkLp4IbGKVU by sun@shitposter.world
2025-11-25T15:15:08.769541Z
3 likes, 2 repeats
@smlx4 @djsumdog the muslim world is extremely patriarchal which muslim women have reduced or no agency in connection with, even when distant from literal patriarchal theocracy countries. I don't know why anyone would go out of their way to defend burqas specifically because it is the extreme example of this, compared to like, hijab, which still is but at least isn't humiliatingly covering the entire body.maybe the stunt was stigmatizing in form, if it was I don't defend that, muslim women deserve respect and to not be joked about but I stand by my opinion that feminism correctly identified the problem in our own culture a very long time ago and now people are trying to reverse it out of misguided cultural sensitivity. the practice is bad.
(DIR) Post #B0bkkUErsyTPKpfAmG by azure@clubcyberia.co
2025-11-25T15:21:10.658752Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@smlx4 @sun @djsumdog Muslims should be stigmatised though
(DIR) Post #B0br6Cnxz6XlMPosRU by moth_ball@shitposter.world
2025-11-25T16:32:19.725340Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@sun @smlx4 @djsumdog The reason for wearing the hijab is always "dad will be upset if I don't" and since mom is allied with dad it's hard to see it as ever being a genuine choice.
(DIR) Post #B0brqtX3SSArCJAkVc by zaitcev@shitposter.world
2025-11-25T16:40:47.145115Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@sun @smlx4 @djsumdog these names always screw with my mind, because a burka in Russian is a type of cloak worn by a warrior on a horseback. A hidzhab is some kind of headgear.
(DIR) Post #B0bsVey2VwG5tmETuC by sun@shitposter.world
2025-11-25T16:48:08.605980Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@moth_ball @djsumdog @smlx4 don’t forget when it’s used as a rejection of the values of the country that graciously took them in as an immigrant/refugee
(DIR) Post #B0cNpDrq4uCoDi8mG0 by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-25T22:19:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@moth_ball @djsumdog @sun perhaps true in some families, as well similar in Christian families about how daughters should dress, but it’s not universal. Again, many women express that they choose the hijab | niqab out of faith, identity, integrity or personal conviction (like nuns for example) not bc their father demands it. Reducing their choices to "dad will be upset" erases their agency & ignores the enormous diversity of experiences. ->
(DIR) Post #B0cNpEfp54BiijWhAO by moth_ball@shitposter.world
2025-11-25T22:39:01.164997Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@smlx4 @djsumdog @sun wow that's crazy
(DIR) Post #B0cNpIeuGPpd5381IG by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-25T22:19:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@moth_ball @djsumdog @sun -> challenge coercion where it occurs but do it should be done without assuming it defines everyone. It’s far too easy to simplify solely due to ignorance & prejudice. Or pure dislike.
(DIR) Post #B0cSkMHpqbkEefnfFo by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-25T08:20:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sim @djsumdog @sun safety concerns shouldn’t be used to justify targeting a whole group or turn their clothing into a political stunt. Millions of Muslim women choose these garments freely & assuming they’re all controlled or abused erases their voices & intelligence. Abuse should always be condemned but it doesn’t solve the problem by blaming the clothing or the women wearing them. ->
(DIR) Post #B0cSkNo8C1AlN7uyES by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-25T08:20:42Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sim @djsumdog @sun -> A lot of the fear & opinions around this is really about preference, unfamiliarity & prejudice rather than actual evidence.
(DIR) Post #B0cSkPCd0QMVhOO33Q by sim@shitposter.world
2025-11-25T23:34:09.290998Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@smlx4 @djsumdog @sun What of the women living in countries where this is mandatory? Do we just ignore them, given that many of them are not even permitted to be outside and when they are, it has to be with a chaperone and wearing garments that actually rob them of their humanity so that the men around them don't catch lustful thoughts? That is the reasoning behind garments that cover everything. It's always a control thing. How do we stop thoughts of lust? Blame women, make them cover up, showing their skin is shameful. That is what this garment actually represents and we shouldn't forget it.I think safety concerns are acceptable to say that someone should be uncovered in certain areas so that we can see their faces and read their intentions. It's an important part of human socialisation. Cutting them off from this socialisation dehumanises the women wearing these garments and denies their inclusion in social society. It makes it harder to interact with them. Some people need to be able to read faces too so covering the face up as some of these garments do will isolate those people. There is so much wrong with it. I could maybe see why some women might choose to cover their hair, but not to cover their whole face. To dehumanise and shame themselves like this. It is about preventing lust. And I understood this clearly from a conversation someone had with a muslim man. That is where his thoughts went. Although he seemed horrified at the thought that he should cover himself up because some men will have lustful thoughts about his beard. Like he hasn't heard of gay men before. I have not forgotten how gay men are treated in muslim societies. I heard a gay man who escaped one tell his story of constantly being beaten up whenever he went in public. He feared for his life. That being gay is shameful. Gay conversion therapy, where he was even forced to jerk off to magazines of naked women while his mother watched. These are the stories we should remember. Because this is actually bigger than western countries and even those countries now have these problems in these communities which few are willing to properly discuss.
(DIR) Post #B0cdbnAjcLy0vcb3SK by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-26T01:15:15Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sim @djsumdog @sun my short answer would be, criticism of oppression is right. Generalizations about millions of people are not. Sure that coercion, violence & patriarchal laws in some countries (too many) are deeply problematic & must & should be criticized. I insist again that it’s important to distinguish between authoritarian societies & choice in democratic countries. ->
(DIR) Post #B0cdboPJ1fDUl6QCo4 by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-26T01:18:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sim @djsumdog @sun -> women who choose to wear the garment must be heard, otherwise we are doing the same thing that ancient patriarchal systems have done & still do: speaking over & for them. Criticising oppression is necessary. But assuming that all women who wear these garments, regardless of country, situation or personal reasons, are oppressed or dehumanized is to simplify a very complex reality. ->
(DIR) Post #B0cdbpHBnKJnSDdEnI by djsumdog@djsumdog.com
2025-11-26T01:35:48.181075Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
choiceYou keep using that word. I don't think you understand it.What's interesting is that clothing itself is the most basic form of a completely irrational belief. It's the oldest shared, collective obsessive compulsion. Most people feels fear and anxiety if we don't conform to wearing clothing, but no one understand why. You can say "it's evolutionary; we slaughtered animals and wore their skin which helped some humans survive the winter; so those humans shamed others that didn't to encourage the behavior change" or whatever evolutionary theory and you realize two things: 1) it's a retroactive explanation no one rationally conceptualized when it happened and 2) it's kinda a fucked up and horrific thing that became normalized because it benefited our survival. I've written about how we've seen this irrationality unfold rapidly and in a very short time span within very recent history. Clothing by itself is a means of culture building. Do you really have the "agency" to chose to wear clothes? Not really. You get put in prison if you don't confirm. Indecent exposure laws and such.This grows into much larger arguments about culture and people. Choice and free will. Do people choose to wear the hijab? Do they make the choice to wear silly hats or participate in the way their society works?But assuming that all women who wear these garments, regardless of country, situation or personal reasons, are oppressed or dehumanized is to simplify a very complex reality.You want to separate out things that are inseparable. Let's not talk about the millions of woman who are forced versus the millions of women who just happen to be in the same type of culture but are not forced. It's literally as silly as when Christians say, "God loves the sinner but not the sin," as if the actions and the individuals are separable.Where are the logical bounds between the woman who wears the clothing with agency and the one who is forced to wear it without? Is that bound real, or a mythos?
(DIR) Post #B0cdbsocdTqOQmITp2 by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-26T01:26:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sim @djsumdog @sun -> It makes all those women invisible despite that they themselves describes their faith & identity in other ways. What do we really & truly know about them & their lives. Safety regulations in certain environments should be discussed - objectively. But that’s completely different from using clothing as political markers to blame entire groups. It lacks dignity., in my opinion.
(DIR) Post #B0cf4Lb5Jsmjl46Mwi by sim@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T01:52:15.638667Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@smlx4 @djsumdog @sun Choice in democratic countries? I don't think this is about democracy. It is about shame and religion. Even in the west, women are living under this system through faith. It is coercion. They are still being oppressed in the west because they come from deeply religious sects that oppress them. We have no idea how deep this goes and it doesn't help that every time we criticise we are met with how we shouldn't generalise, we are effectively tone policed. It is deeply problematic in western countries now because it has been imported. This shame culture makes it acceptable to rape women that don't wear these garments. To blame them for how they are dressed. To blame them for the lusts of men. This perpetuates it. I am listening to the women. To women in the other countries where in one example, one young woman (I think, not sure if teen or young adult) ended up being beaten up because some skin accidentally showed in public as she was buying something. The police that deal with this caught her and then beat her uncle up for this when he came for her. In western countries, these girls are being married off young. The entire culture is here under sharia courts. It doesn't matter if they are in a democratic country. Not wearing this garment is considered shameful to the family. The family end up oppressing young girls and women into this. We have acid attacks, honour killings, FGM, the lot of it. But we're not allowed to generalise while these girls and women are being failed by us in the west? How about we actually resolve these problems first before running cover for the people that keep them going? I don't see how it can be a choice to wear the face covering, that it can be a choice when you simply cannot control the thoughts or lusts of other people around you? It is about lust and control once again.
(DIR) Post #B0cglD3Z37LXfyQPOy by sim@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T02:11:12.629409Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@djsumdog @smlx4 @sun It puts things into perspective when you realise that the garment is there to prevent men from having lustful thoughts as if this even works. It creates a shame culture which I thought we were opposed to. It puts things into perspective when you realise that by covering the face up, then you can easily ignore and socially isolate women from public life. It is easier to dehumanise them. It puts things into perspective when you realise that there are men who won't even shake hands with a woman. That they don't see women as equals, as people that should be in public life in business. This garment makes it easier to do all this. How is it a choice to wear this? We were supposed to be opposed to this form of oppression but now it seems like we'll defend it. But I will criticise this garment and what it represents. It should be seen as more shameful to coerce women into wearing this garment, we should be aiming for that because women in countries where it is mandatory need this. They actually need us to shame this garment because shame is what their culture understands. The prince doesn't want the west to see him as permitting shameful acts as it embarrasses him. This is what the women there say. This is how some changes have been made. But instead we call it a choice. I don't buy it as a choice. It is not a choice, no one can control the lusts of other people.
(DIR) Post #B0d6qswfKhxLqcZ6Dw by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-26T00:17:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@moth_ball @djsumdog @sun depends entirely on what perspective one has & the image one prefers in terms of knowledge or understanding. I defend the right of individuals to choose for themselves.
(DIR) Post #B0d6quBaihUPhCYX7w by moth_ball@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T07:03:31.595689Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@smlx4 @djsumdog @sun it doesn't matter what you think but alright
(DIR) Post #B0d7k5Iz536M6nKF6W by mrsaturday@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T07:13:32.666640Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@moth_ball @sun @djsumdog @smlx4 I have seen it rationalized by Muslim women as a sign of piety and modesty, which I can respect. If it's a matter of "if I don't, my husband and every male in his extended family will beat me half to death" like it often is among those communities, then that's totally different.I do think Western societies need to start asserting their own standards, though.
(DIR) Post #B0d88RiNPid2YooqK8 by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-26T07:12:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@moth_ball @djsumdog @sun same goes to you. Thanks 👍
(DIR) Post #B0d88S0oJBNFTzRZ3Y by lebronjames75@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T07:17:55.729038Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@smlx4 @moth_ball @djsumdog @sun been a while since i last saw the sweden yes stereotype lashing out
(DIR) Post #B0dAmBzlTgg7Ib24sS by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-26T07:41:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lebronjames75 @djsumdog @moth_ball @sun it's called defense. No matter what we think or believe, we should always defend people's right to choose. When we stop doing that, it will most likely lead to devastation, which ends with the strongest deciding for others.
(DIR) Post #B0dAmCHUPmrABZKEVM by lebronjames75@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T07:47:30.906536Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@smlx4 @djsumdog @moth_ball @sun yup No matter what, never ever in any possible scenario should any single person in any single scenario be stopped from their right to exercise their free will (as long as it doesn't infringe on any other rights) Nope, there is not a single scenario in the world, never has been, never will be, where that would be a bad ideai recommend giving fentanyl to new born
(DIR) Post #B0dB1Uh8EgeXdcc65Y by lebronjames75@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T07:50:17.955972Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@smlx4 @djsumdog @moth_ball @sun actually what about child prostitution starting from whatever age they reach sexual ripeness, that's something kids should be allowed to do fully of their own will
(DIR) Post #B0dB8LiE1x3To5OTIW by lebronjames75@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T07:51:32.273156Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@djsumdog @moth_ball @smlx4 @sun gambling shouldn't have age laws tbh
(DIR) Post #B0dBAtJu35TqcPEHK4 by lebronjames75@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T07:52:00.175555Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@djsumdog @moth_ball @smlx4 @sun check yourself before you wreck yourself
(DIR) Post #B0dC98qJSrg28W7Ot6 by moth_ball@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T08:02:53.396190Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@smlx4 @lebronjames75 @djsumdog @sun naive to think that you have agency inside someone else's family dynamics
(DIR) Post #B0dDXmRE09YbqLhDbU by moth_ball@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T08:18:32.797068Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@lebronjames75 @djsumdog @smlx4 @sun dick yourself before you shit yourself
(DIR) Post #B0dDwkhNbcH3gj9yhU by moth_ball@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T08:23:03.054505Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@mer @djsumdog @smlx4 @lebronjames75 @sun that's a lot of text about something that doesn't matter at all
(DIR) Post #B0dEREsNyG5ByAqSFk by moth_ball@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T08:28:33.430642Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@mer @djsumdog @smlx4 @lebronjames75 @sun I was being a bit harsh, sorry about that. Your analysis was good.
(DIR) Post #B0dGcHLxImEQkH4HfU by lebronjames75@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T08:52:57.056640Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@mer @djsumdog @smlx4 @moth_ball @sun I think there is quite a large gap between body mutilation, and having your head dunked in water for some questionable reasona gigantic gapand it is this insane gap that is the critical factor here, making one of these not fine vs be finesame for women not having the choice to practice their family religion while not participating in one part of the religion's ritual, alternative being grounds for death. now claiming this symbol of oppression guaranteed by exile or death, is actually a symbol for the opposite, is delusional at best, dangerous at worst. allow it, and its to allow oppression by culture of the religion (locked to one choice). forbid it, its to allow oppression by the state/ban-enforcing-organization (locked out of one choice). The correct choice is "for gods sake just let me be, don't be a unmindful shithead about wearing it and don't fuck others". if that is not painted out to be a possible option, then the choice i would always choose first would be the forbid.tldr:"let be". and if not, then escalating banhammer.
(DIR) Post #B0dHtJpTRtL1ImZ2y8 by moth_ball@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T09:07:15.090597Z
2 likes, 1 repeats
@mer @djsumdog @smlx4 @lebronjames75 @sun thanks, docc
(DIR) Post #B0dKUX3vPYkexzCDeC by Ree@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T09:36:23.697506Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@smlx4 @sim @djsumdog @sun >freelyYeah whatever
(DIR) Post #B0dKnt7zb11Yu6KPaa by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-25T22:09:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sun @djsumdog patriarchy exists in many cultures, not to mention how women are silenced & treated as objects of pleasure in the West. It’s simply not true that Muslim women have no agency, since in many families, women have a strong role, a strong voice & make important decisions in their own homes. ->
(DIR) Post #B0dKnuYGIpdDJrcuAq by Ree@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T09:39:52.434968Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@smlx4 @sun @djsumdog I don't think women are viewed as objects of pleasure because you have weirdos removing content from media.
(DIR) Post #B0dKo0d5hn3kAZvqXA by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-25T22:11:48Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sun @djsumdog -> they are definitely not passive or voiceless. We can & should criticise harmful practices where they happen but should not generalize millions of women or ignore their lived experiences just bc those experiences do not fit our external stereotype.
(DIR) Post #B0dKvYmr6gwo8O6FjE by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-26T09:39:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@moth_ball @djsumdog @lebronjames75 @sun it’s truly sad to sink so low. You have to have a pretty abnormal mind when you choose to misunderstand & be ironic at the expense of others. Go ahead, as long as it pleases you, I won't stand in your way.
(DIR) Post #B0dKvaJrPSwUt2Y7oO by moth_ball@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T09:41:15.376411Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@smlx4 @djsumdog @lebronjames75 @sun you deliberately chose to stand in my way
(DIR) Post #B0dLEfHHCOnFlbRGWe by Ree@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T09:44:44.037008Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@lebronjames75 @smlx4 @djsumdog @moth_ball @sun swedish have cuck genes I heard.
(DIR) Post #B0dLJtCAsfEANbXlYW by Ree@shitposter.world
2025-11-26T09:45:40.711496Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@lebronjames75 @djsumdog @moth_ball @smlx4 @sun drinking and smoking shouldn't have age laws either
(DIR) Post #B0ddPhYgrDorCWzptA by djsumdog@djsumdog.com
2025-11-26T13:08:21.251894Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
and yet non-consensual male genital mutilation (circumcision) of children is a barbaric practice that's accepted morally and legally in many nations.Longstanding traditions from large ethnic or religious groups really muddy the waters on what's acceptable here.
(DIR) Post #B0lMcr5KbbAMYUd6bA by smlx4@mastodon.nu
2025-11-26T06:58:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sim @djsumdog @sun your point of view rests on the assumption of erasure. As if all these women were passive victims without the slightest room for their own action & own will. It should not be dismissed that all these women wear it voluntarily for cultural, personal or spiritual reasons. The real problem is not the fabric - it’s the lack of freedom. Women's right to choose should be defended, not dictated on which choices are acceptable.
(DIR) Post #B0lMcsSlTxVMpSbKlM by sim@shitposter.world
2025-11-30T06:37:58.970575Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@smlx4 @djsumdog @sun Are you seriously defending a garment as a choice where their face is covered save for a hole for the eyes to see through? Wearing that is a choice? It is both the fabric and lacking choice that is the problem. It is a problem for so many reasons that I have already pointed out here. I don't see how this is considered a garment to wear. We should not call this a choice. This continues their oppression on. I don't even think you can call it required by religion, something done for religious reasons. This is the extreme end of it.